ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2020
Simple Selection Procedure to Distinguish between Static and Flexible Loops.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome-Wide Identification and Characterization of theBiology · 2026Article
- Enzymatic and Biophysical Analysis of two Highly Related Cytochrome P450 Reductases frombioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Metal-Coordination Specificity and Structural Dynamics of C. elegans Metallothionein I: Insights From 3D Modeling and MD Simulations.Proteins · 2026Article
- Exploring common pathogenic association between Epstein Barr virus infection and long-COVID by integrating RNA-Seq and molecular dynamics simulations.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Structural and Evolutionary Analysis Indicate That the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro Is a Challenging Target for Small-Molecule Inhibitor Design.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Loops are the most variable and unorganized elements of the secondary structure of proteins. Their ability to shift their shape can play a role in the binding of small ligands, enzymatic catalysis, or protein-protein interactions. Due to the loop flexibility, the positions of their residues in solved structures show the largest B-factors, or in a worst-case scenario can be unknown. Based on the loops' movements' timeline, they can be divided into slow (static) and fast (flexible). Although most of the loops that are missing in experimental structures belong to the flexible loops group, the computational tools for loop reconstruction use a set of static loop conformations to predict the missing part of the structure and evaluate the model. We believe that these two loop types can adopt different conformations and that using scoring functions appropriate for static loops is not sufficient for flexible loops. We showed that common model evaluation methods, are insufficient in the case of flexible solvent-exposed loops. Instead, we recommend using the potential energy to evaluate such loop models. We provide a novel model selection method based on a set of geometrical parameters to distinguish between flexible and static loops without the use of molecular dynamics simulations. We have also pointed out the importance of water network and interactions with the solvent for the flexible loop modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.